I think the framing as “goals” to “achieve” suggests that the individual who holds them has to be involved in achieving them, possibly with help. Is this intended?
I think you’re saying that the word “achieve” has the connotation of actively doing something (and “earning credit for it”)? That’s not the meaning I intended. There are conceivable circumstances where “achieving your life goals” (for specific life goals) implies getting out of the way so others can do something better. (I’m reminded of the recent post here titled I want to be replaced.)
Similarly, “be a good person” seems both self-oriented and other-regarding, and these are the terms virtue ethicists think in.
I agree!
I don’t think it’s that weird to consider that helping someone achieve their life goal to do good (e.g. effective altruism) does in fact help them flourish. Maybe this is more strongly the case if their life goal is to “be a good person” rather than “do good”.
There could be a situation where the best way to benefit Alice’s life goal is by doing something that leads to Alice becoming depressed. E.g., if Alice thinks she’s the best person for some role with a mission that’s in line with her life goal, but you’re confident she’s not, you’d vote against her. I think there’s still a sense in which we can defensibly interpret this as “doing something (ultimately) good for Alice” because there’s something to living with one’s eyes open and not deluding oneself, etc. But my point is that it’s not necessarily the most natural or the only natural interpretation.
I think you’re saying that the word “achieve” has the connotation of actively doing something (and “earning credit for it”)? That’s not the meaning I intended. There are conceivable circumstances where “achieving your life goals” (for specific life goals) implies getting out of the way so others can do something better. (I’m reminded of the recent post here titled I want to be replaced.)
I agree!
There could be a situation where the best way to benefit Alice’s life goal is by doing something that leads to Alice becoming depressed. E.g., if Alice thinks she’s the best person for some role with a mission that’s in line with her life goal, but you’re confident she’s not, you’d vote against her. I think there’s still a sense in which we can defensibly interpret this as “doing something (ultimately) good for Alice” because there’s something to living with one’s eyes open and not deluding oneself, etc. But my point is that it’s not necessarily the most natural or the only natural interpretation.